I have create an architecture on AWS (hope it should not be wrong) by using the ELB, autoscaling, RDS and one node ec2 instance outside the ELB. Now I am not getting, that, how I can implement the SSL on this architecture.
Let me explain this in brief:
I have created one Classic Load Balancer.
Created on autoscaling group.
Assign instances to autoscaling group.
And lastly I have created one Instance that I am using for the node and this is outside the Load Balancer and Autoscaling group.
Now when I have implemented the SSL to my Load Balancer, the inner instances are communicating with the node instance on the HTTP request and because the node instance is outside the load balancer so the request is getting blocked.
Can someone please help me to implement the SSL for this architecture.
Sorry if you got confused with my architecture, if there is any other best architecture could be possible then please let me know I can change my architecture.
Thanks,
When you have static content, your best bet is to serve it from Cloudfront using an S3 bucket as its origin.
About SSL, you could set the SSL at your ELB level, follow the documentation .
Your ELB listens on two ports: 80 and 443 and communicates with your ASG instances only using their open port 80.
So when secure requests come to the ELB, it forwards them to your server ( EC2 in the ASG ). Then, your server, listening on port 80, receives the request; if the request have the X-FORWARDED-PROTO HTTPS, the server does nothing, otherwise it sets it and forward/rewrite the URL to be a secure one and the process restart.
I hope this helps and be careful of ERR_TOO_MANY_REDIRECTS
Have you considered using an Application Load Balancer with two target groups and a listener rule?
If the single EC2 instance is just hosting static content, and is serving content on a common path (e.g. /static), then everything can sit behind a shared load balancer with one common certificate that you can configure with ACM.
"because the node instance is outside the load balancer so the request
is getting blocked."
If they're in the same VPC you should check the security group that you've assigned to your instances. Specifically you're going to want to allow connections coming in to the ports 443 and/or 80 on the stand-alone instance to be accessible from the security group assigned to the load balancer instances - let's call those 'sg-load_balancer' (check your AWS Console to see what the actual security group id is).
To check this - select the security group for the stand-alone instance, notice the tabs at the bottom of the page. Click on the 'Inbound' tab. You should see a set of rules... You'll want to make sure there's one for HTTP and/or HTTPS and in the 'Source' instead of putting the IP address put the security group for the load balancer instances -- it'll start with sg- and the console will give you a dropdown to show you valid entries.
If you don't see the security group for the load balancer instances there's a good chance they're not in the same VPC. To check - bring up the console and look for the VPC Id on each node. That'll start with vpc_. These should be the same. If not you'll have to setup rules and routing tables to allow traffic between them... That's a bit more involved, take a look at a similar problem to get some ideas on how to solve that problem: Allowing Amazon VPC A to get to a new private subnet on VPC B?
Related
Disclaimers: I come from AWS background but relatively very new to GCP. I know there are a number of existing similar questions (e.g, here and here etc) but I still cannot get it work since the exact/detailed instructions are still missing. So please bear with me to ask this again.
My simple design:
Public HTTP/S Traffic (Ingress) >> GCP Load Balancer >> GCP Servers
GCP Load Balancer holds the SSL Cert. And then it uses Port 80 for downstream connections to the Servers. Therefore, LB to the Servers are just HTTP.
My question:
How do I prevent the incoming HTTP/S Public Traffic from reaching to the GCP Servers directly? Instead, only allow the Load Balancer (as well as it's Healthcheck Traffic)?
What I tried so far:
I went into Firewall Rules and removed the previously allowing rule of Ports 80/443 (Ingress Traffic) from 0.0.0.0/0. And then, added (allowed) the External IP address of Load Balancer.
At this point, I simply expected the Public Traffic should be rejected but the Load Balancer's. But in reality, both seemed to be rejected. Nothing reached the Servers anymore. The Load Balancer's External IP wasn't seemed to be recognised.
Later I also noticed the "Healthchecks" were also not recognised anymore. Therefore Healthchecks couldn't reach to Servers and then failed. Hence the Instances were dropped by Load Balancer.
Please also note that: I cannot pursue the approach of simply removing the External IPs on the Servers. (Although many people say this would work.) But we still want to maintain the direct SSH accesses to the Servers (by not using a Bastion Instance). Therefore I still need the External IPs, on each and every Web Servers.
Any clear (and kind) instructions will be very much appreciated. Thank you all.
You're able to setup HTTPS connectivity between your load balancer and your back-end servers while using HTTP(S) load balancer. To achieve this goal you should install HTTPS certificates on your back-end servers and configure web-servers to use them. If you decided to completely switch to HTTPS and disable HTTP on your back-end servers you should switch your health check from HTTP to HTTPS also.
To make health check working again after removing default firewall rule that allow connection from 0.0.0.0/0 to ports 80 and 443 you need to whitelist subnets 35.191.0.0/16 and 130.211.0.0/22 which are source IP ranges for health checks. You can find step by step instructions how to do it in the documentation. After that, access to your web servers still be restricted but your load balancer will be able to use health check and serve your customers.
I'm trying to load balance a nodejs Server sent event backend and I need to know if there is a way to distribute the new connections to the instances with the least connected clients. The problem I have is when scaling up, the routing continues sending new connections to the already saturated instance and since the connections are long lived this simply won't work.
What options do I have for horizontal scaling long lived connections?
It looks like you want a Load Balancer that can provide both "sticky sessions" and use the "least connection" instead of "round-robin" policy. Unfortunately, NGINX cannot provide this.
HAProxy (High Availability Proxy) allows for this:
backend bk_myapp
cookie MyAPP insert indirect nocache
balance leastconn
server srv1 10.0.0.1:80 check cookie srv1
server srv2 10.0.0.2:80 check cookie srv2
If you need ELB functionality and want to roll it all manually, take a look at this guide.
You might also want to make sure classic AWS ELB "sticky session" configuration or the newer ALB "sticky session" option does not meet your needs. ELB normally sends connection to upstream server with the least "load", and when combining with sticky sessions might be enough.
Since you are using AWS, I'd recommend Elastic Beanstalk for your Node.js application deployment. The official documentation provides good examples, like this one. Note that Beanstalk will automatically create an Elastic Load Balancer for you, which is what you're looking for.
By default, Elastic Beanstalk creates an Application Load Balancer for
your environment when you enable load balancing with the Elastic
Beanstalk console or the EB CLI. It configures the load balancer to
listen for HTTP traffic on port 80 and forward this traffic to
instances on the same port.
[...]
Note:
Your environment must be in a VPC with subnets in at least two
Availability Zones to create an Application Load Balancer. All new AWS
accounts include default VPCs that meet this requirement. If your
environment is in a VPC with subnets in only one Availability Zone, it
defaults to a Classic Load Balancer. If you don't have any subnets,
you can't enable load balancing.
Note that the configuration of a proper health check path is key to properly balance requests, as you mentioned in your question.
In a load balanced environment, Elastic Load Balancing sends a request
to each instance in an environment every 10 seconds to confirm that
instances are healthy. By default, the load balancer is configured to
open a TCP connection on port 80. If the instance acknowledges the
connection, it is considered healthy.
You can choose to override this setting by specifying an existing
resource in your application. If you specify a path, such as /health,
the health check URL is set to HTTP:80/health. The health check URL
should be set to a path that is always served by your application. If
it is set to a static page that is served or cached by the web server
in front of your application, health checks will not reveal issues
with the application server or web container.
EDIT: If you're looking for sticky sessions, as I described in the comments, follow the steps provided in this guide:
To enable sticky sessions using the console
Open the Amazon EC2 console at https://console.aws.amazon.com/ec2/.
On the navigation pane, under LOAD BALANCING, choose Target Groups.
Select the target group.
On the Description tab, choose Edit attributes.
On the Edit attributes page, do the following:
a. Select Enable load balancer generated cookie stickiness.
b. For Stickiness duration, specify a value between 1 second and 7 days.
c. Choose Save.
I need help in this scenario
My an ec2 instance is receiving requests, I don't want on client end to change server path based on few requests (especially on chat)
My first ec2 instance bypass requests based on few path patterns to my other created instance. (In other words, I want to redirect traffic from first to second)
Is there any way to fulfill above scenario.
You can use AWS CloudFront as a proxy for your use case where you can plugin the two EC2 instances behind CloudFront as Origins and Add behavior rules (Path rules) to switch traffic to one or the other.
Your client will send requests only to the CloudFront URL(Or DNS mapped through Route53) and won't be knowing about the EC2 instances behind. This approach will work, if your EC2 instances are publicly accessible but will be cost effective and reduce the load on your services, if you happen to cache content.
Alternative approach is to use an Application Load Balancer with path based routing configuration.
Following tutorial will guide you through the steps.
Tutorial: Use Path-Based Routing with Your Application Load Balancer
I fear that this might be a programming question, but I am also hopeful that it is common enough that you might have some suggestions.
I am moving to a fail-over environment using AWS elastic load balancers to direct the traffic to the EC2 instances. Currently, I have set up the ELB with a single EC2 instance behind it. You will see why in a moment. This is still in test mode, although it is delivering content to my customers using this ELB -> EC2 path.
In each of my production environments (I have two) I have an AWS certificate on the load balancer and a privately acquired security certificate on the EC2 instance. The load balancer listeners are configured to send traffic received on port 443 to the secure port (443) on the EC2 instance. This is working; however, as I scale up to more EC2 instances behind the load balancer, I have to buy a security certificate for each of these EC2 instances.
Using a recommendation that was proposed to me, I have set up a test environment with a new load balancer and its configured EC2 server. This ELB server sends messages received on its port 443 to port 80 on the EC2 system. I am told that this is the way it should be done - limit encryption/decryption to the load balancer and use unencrypted communication between the load balancer and its instances.
Finally, here is my problem. The HTML pages being served by this application use relative references to the embedded scripts and other artifacts within each page. When the request reaches the EC2 instance (the application server) it has been demoted to HTTP, regardless of what it was originally.This means that the references to these embedded artifacts are rendered as insecure (HTTP). Because the original page reference was secure (HTTPS), the browser refuses to load these insecure resources.
I am already using the header X-Forwarded-Proto within the application to determine if the original request at the load balancer was HTTP or HTTPS. I am hoping against hope that there is some parameter in the EC2 instance that tells it to render relative reference in accordance to the received X-Forwarded-Proto header. Barring that, do you have any ideas about how others have solved this problem?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
First of all it is the right way to go by having the SSL termination at ELB/ALB and then having a security group assigned to EC2 that only accepts traffic from ELB/ALB.
However responding with https urls based on the X-Forwarded-Proto request headers or based on custom configuration, needs to be handle in your application code or webserver.
I am trying to connect my app, running on one EC2 instance, to MongoDB, running on another EC2 instance. I'm pretty sure the problem is in the security settings, but I'm not quite sure how to handle that.
First off, my app's instance is in an autoscaling group that sits behind an ELB. The inbound security settings for the instance and ELB allow access to port 80 from anywhere, as well as all traffic from its own security group.
The EC2 instance that runs Mongo is able to take connections if the security group for that instance accepts all inbound traffic from anywhere. Any other configuration that I've tried causes the app to say that it cannot make a connection with the remote address. I've set rules to accept inbound traffic from all security groups that I have, but it only seems to work when I allow all traffic from anywhere.
Also, my db instance is set up with an elastic ip. Should I have this instance behind an ELB as well?
So my questions are these:
1) How can I securely make connections to my EC2 instance running mongo?
2) In terms of architecture, does it make sense to run my database this way, or should I have this behind a load balancer as well?
This issue is tripping me up a lot more than I thought it would, so any help would be appreciated.
NOTE
I have also set the bind_ip=0.0.0.0 in /etc/mongo.conf
Your issue is that you are using the public elastic IP to connect to your database server from your other servers. This means that the connection is going out to the internet and back into your VPC, which presents the following issues:
Security issues due to the data transmission not being contained within your VPC
Network latency issues
Your database server's security group can't identify the security group of the inbound connections
Get rid of the elastic IP on the MongoDB server, there is no need for it unless you plan to connect to it from outside your VPC. Modify your servers to use the private internal IP address assigned to your database server when creating connections to it. Finally, lock your security group back down to only allow access to the DB from your other security group(s).
Optional: Create a private hosted zone in Route53, with an A record pointing to your database server's private IP address, then use that hostname instead of the internal IP address.